Pittsburgh Personal Injury Attorneyhttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com
Tue, 20 Feb 2018 16:54:33 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1San Francisco Motorcyclist Claims GM Self-Driving Vehicle Caused His Accidenthttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/san-francisco-motorcyclist-claims-gm-self-driving-vehicle-caused-his-accident/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/san-francisco-motorcyclist-claims-gm-self-driving-vehicle-caused-his-accident/#commentsTue, 20 Feb 2018 16:54:16 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=377[...]]]>On January 22, 2018, a California man filed a new lawsuit against General Motors in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiff claims that he suffered serious injuries to his neck and shoulder after colliding with a GM self-driving vehicle.

ABC News reported that the latest crash between the plaintiff, who was riding a motorcycle and the GM vehicle “is raising concerns over this emerging technology we see on our roadways.”

Plaintiff Blames Self-Driving Car for Accident

The DMV in California states that as of January 29, 2018, they’ve received 55 reports of traffic accidents including an autonomous vehicle. The Washington Post reports that two Teslas were involved in separate crashes in January alone.

The plaintiff states in his case that he was proceeding east on the middle lane of Oak Street in San Francisco on December 7, 2017. He was riding his motorcycle. Meanwhile, another individual was driving a 2016 Chevrolet vehicle, manufactured by GM, and had the vehicle in self-driving mode.

At one point, the plaintiff ended up behind the self-driving vehicle. The driver of that vehicle changed lanes to the left. The plaintiff continued straight, but then according to him, the self-driving vehicle suddenly veered back into the plaintiff’s lane, striking him and knocking him to the ground. As a result of the crash, he claims he suffered serious injuries to his neck and shoulder and will require lengthy treatment. He was also forced to take disability leave from his work.

The plaintiff claims that GM was negligent and breached its duty to be sure that the self-driving vehicle operated according to traffic laws and regulations. He seeks in excess of $75,000 in damages.

Was the Motorcyclist at Fault?

The DMV report on the incident tells a slightly different story. It says that the GM self-driving vehicle started to merge into the left lane, but then one of the vehicles in that lane decelerated. Sensing that deceleration and the closing gap in the left lane, the self-driving vehicle stopped making the lane change and returned to the center lane.

As it was doing so, the plaintiff’s motorcycle, which the DMV says had just lane-split between two vehicles in the center and right lanes (legal in California), moved into the center lane, too, “glanced the side” of the autonomous vehicle, wobbled, and fell over.

The report adds that the motorcyclist was determined to be at fault for attempting to overtake and pass another vehicle “under conditions that did not permit that movement….”

ABC News added that according to the plaintiff’s lawyer, the self-driving car made a maneuver that was unpredictable and dangerous.

More Self-Driving Car Lawsuits Likely in the Future

This is one of the first lawsuits to be filed involving a self-driving vehicle. The Post states that experts are already warning “that there will probably be many more accidents involving robot-operated cars, a type of accident that raises unresolved questions about responsibility and restitution.”

It is likely that the data from the autonomous vehicle, including radar sensor data and video recordings, will be used as evidence in court. However the case turns out, it will be watched carefully as self-driving cars continue to increase on America’s roads.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/san-francisco-motorcyclist-claims-gm-self-driving-vehicle-caused-his-accident/feed/0Texas Couple Sues State Farm Alleging Insurer Encouraged Shoddy Repairshttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/texas-couple-sues-state-farm-alleging-insurer-encouraged-shoddy-repairs/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/texas-couple-sues-state-farm-alleging-insurer-encouraged-shoddy-repairs/#commentsWed, 14 Feb 2018 14:47:14 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=356[...]]]>Who controls how your vehicle is repaired after an accident? You might think that you do, or that your body or mechanic shop does, but that may be an incorrect assumption.

A Texas jury recently sided with the plaintiffs—who had been injured in a car accident—when they said that their body shop performed substandard repairs on their 2010 Honda Fit. The shoddy repairs allegedly made the effects of the accident worse, but it’s not only the shop that may have to pay.

The plaintiffs’ counsel has also filed a related lawsuit against the couple’s auto insurer, which they say bullied the body shop into using the low-cost approach.

Couple Suffers Severe Injuries in Texas Car Crash

The couple had owned their Honda Fit for only four months when the accident occurred. They were on their way to spend the Christmas holiday with the wife’s grandmother when a Toyota Tundra hit their Honda head-on. The Honda caught fire, but the couple may have escaped had not the roof collapsed. As it was, the roof caved in and trapped the occupants inside.

Both suffered from crushing injuries, including arm, chest, and rib injuries and some internal organ damage. The husband, who was driving, also suffered from third-degree burns on his legs and feet. They were able to get out only when rescuers pulled them out.

After an investigation, the couple learned that the Honda had undergone roof repair before they bought it, and that during that repair, the metal roof had been glued rather than welded back onto the vehicle frame—a method that cost about $3,000 less. In October 2017, a Texas jury awarded the couple $42 million in their lawsuit against the body shop and the driver of the Toyota Tundra. The body shop was held 75 percent liable.

But the plaintiffs aren’t finished. They’ve also filed a lawsuit against State Farm Insurance, claiming that the company pressured the body shop into using the cheaper repair option.

Plaintiffs Claim Insurance Company Pressured Body Shop

In their second lawsuit, the Texas plaintiffs claim that State Farm directed the body shop to use an untested 3M panel bonding adhesive on their new Honda roof, rather than the Honda-specified welding to replace the old roof, which had been damaged in a hailstorm. The case was filed in response to testimony from the body shop director.

One of the plaintiffs’ experts claimed that the substandard repair made their accident much worse than it needed to be, and that if the roof had been repaired correctly, the plaintiffs probably would have walked away with only minor injuries. Their legal counsel added that other insurance companies pressure repair shops to make cheap repairs where possible, and that it happens frequently across the country.

In this lawsuit, the plaintiffs seek one million in damages, and want to send a message to insurance companies to do what’s right. They bring counts of negligence, deceptive trade practices, and breach of warranties.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/texas-couple-sues-state-farm-alleging-insurer-encouraged-shoddy-repairs/feed/0Study: Reduce Roadway Deaths, Increase National Incomehttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/study-reduce-roadway-deaths-increase-national-income/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/study-reduce-roadway-deaths-increase-national-income/#commentsTue, 13 Feb 2018 19:57:23 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=362[...]]]>According to a recent World Bank report, about 1.25 million people die on the world’s roads every year, and another 20-50 million are seriously injured. On top of that, road traffic injuries “are the single largest cause of mortality and long-term disability among people aged 15-29….”

The fatalities and injuries are horrific, but the report goes on to detail the effect of these losses on the economic and social welfare of low- and middle-income countries.

World Bank Analyzes Effect of Traffic Injuries on Economic and Social Welfare

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) states that there were 34,439 fatal car crashes in the U.S. in 2016, and safety organizations are working to get that number down. But according to this recent report, 90 percent of road traffic injuries occur in low- and middle-income countries. The World Bank, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies, wanted to find out how that was affecting economic growth and social welfare.

They conducted an analysis based on data collected from 135 countries over 25 years. They turned their focus to five diverse countries—China, India, the Philippines, Thailand, and Tanzania. They found that overall, reducing the number of road traffic injuries (RTIs) “not only increases income growth, but also generates substantial welfare benefits to societies.”

More specifically, they found that making changes to increase roadway safety could lead to long-term income growth—a 7 to 22 percent increase in GDP per capita—and could build human capital.

Other Studies Find that Car Accidents Create a Public Health Problem

This isn’t the first time scientists have looked into this connection. In 2012, for example, researchers noted that road traffic accidents had emerged “as an important public health issue….” They added that the rising number of injuries and deaths in countries like India was “becoming alarming,” and increasing day by day.

These accidents create a large burden on not only those who are injured, but their families and others. Researchers noted that the victims typically suffer social, physical, and psychological effects, and that the accidents put a significant strain on health care budgets. They suggested interventions to increase safety, including the following:

Phase out old, highly polluting vehicles and make sure the new ones all have seat belts and other safety provisions.

Maintain good road conditions and proper footpaths for pedestrians. Make sure roads and junctions are wide and well lit.

Make sure drivers are properly trained and properly licensed.

Pass laws to require the wearing of helmets by two-wheeled vehicles and seat belts by four-wheeled vehicles.

Provide medical care and first aid care facilities on highways and busy roads, and make sure victims get adequate medical treatment.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/study-reduce-roadway-deaths-increase-national-income/feed/0Takata Expands Airbag Recall Again by 3 Millionhttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/takata-expands-airbag-recall-again-by-3-million/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/takata-expands-airbag-recall-again-by-3-million/#commentsFri, 02 Feb 2018 16:14:50 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=354[...]]]>Takata has once again expanded its airbag recall, this time by another about 3.3 million inflators, according to USA Today. This recall affects frontal airbags in model year 2009, 2010, and 2013 vehicles made by different automakers.

The Takata airbag recall was already the biggest ever in the country, and it continues to grow. These latest inflators were found to be defective and have been added to the list. To date, 20 people are alleged to have died because of Takata airbag explosions, and about 180 have allegedly been injured.

Takata Airbag Recalls Have Been Going Since 2008

Takata has been gradually recalling some inflators since about 2008, when Honda promised replacements for 4,000 Accords and Civics because of the potential for airbag ruptures. Other smaller recalls occurred in 2009, 2010, and 2011, and in 2013, they started to expand further, including 3.4 million recalled by Toyota, Honda, Nissan, and Mazda.

In June 2014, Takata CEO, Shigehisa Takata apologized to shareholders because the growing recall problems were affecting the bottom line. At that point, automakers had recalled about 10.5 million vehicles to replace inflators that could explode upon deployment and shoot shrapnel into the interior of the vehicle. Potential injuries included hearing and vision loss, cuts and lacerations, and knife-like wounds that could cause life-threatening bleeding and even death.

Meanwhile, stories continued to come out about consumers suffering from serious injuries, some fatal, when they were involved in an accident with a Takata airbag. In October 2014, for example, an Orlando woman died just a few days after she was in an accident with her 2001 Honda Accord in which the airbag exploded. She was only 51 years old.

Takata Eventually Files for Bankruptcy

By 2015, Takata was struggling to make enough replacement inflators to replace the defective ones. Some consumers received recall notices only to be told by their dealerships that the parts weren’t in, and they’d have to wait. For some consumers, if they had no other transportation alternative, they had to drive vehicles with potentially defective airbags in them.

As the automakers continued to add more and more vehicles to the recall, Honda hired a U.S. engineering consultancy to investigate Takata airbag problems. The Atlantic and other news outlets zeroed in on what may be causing the problem—the propellant that was used in the inflators, namely, ammonium nitrate. Takata replaced tetrazole, which they were using before, with this new propellant in 2001. Investigators later reported that some Takata employees were uncomfortable with the change, and warned of serious safety risks with the new fuel.

By November of 2015, Takata had agreed to phase out the use of ammonium nitrate, while paying a $70 million fine as part of a deal with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As part of the deal, the NHTSA prioritized recalls “so the greatest safety risks are addressed first,” according to their press release, and set deadlines for future recalls.

Since then, older, “high risk” vehicles in hot, humid areas have been first on the list for repairs, because time, heat, and humidity area believed to be factors in creating an unstable inflator. In January 2017, Takata pled guilty to criminal wrongdoing and agreed to pay $1 billion in penalties. And in June 2017, they filed for bankruptcy. Key Safety Systems was slated to take over this year (2018).

Currently the recall includes about 45 million vehicles.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/takata-expands-airbag-recall-again-by-3-million/feed/0Drivers Often Guilty of Inattentive Blindness When it Comes to Motorcycleshttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/motorcycle-accidents/drivers-often-guilty-of-inattentive-blindness-when-it-comes-to-motorcycles/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/motorcycle-accidents/drivers-often-guilty-of-inattentive-blindness-when-it-comes-to-motorcycles/#commentsWed, 31 Jan 2018 17:05:57 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=350[...]]]>The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) states that in 2016, nearly 5,000 motorcyclists died in crashes, which was more than double the number of motorcycle deaths in 1997. A total of 29 percent were younger than 30 years old, and 36 percent were 50 years and older. Sixty-eight percent of the female motorcyclists who died in crashes that year were passengers, and 61 percent of drivers killed were wearing their helmets.

Study Shows Drivers Unlikely to See Motorcyclists

For the study, researchers asked 56 adults to look at a series of photographs that represented different driving situations from a driver’s perspective. They then asked the participants to determine whether the photograph represented a safe or unsafe driving situation. In the last picture in the series, they introduced an unexpected object, like a motorcycle or a taxicab.

Results showed that 48 percent of the participants (nearly half) did not notice the additional object. They were also twice as likely to miss a motorcycle as a taxi. In a survey taken before the experiments were conducted, participants admitted as much—that they believed they would be far less likely to notice a motorcycle as a taxi.

Researchers concluded that “inattentional blindness”—a term that describes a situation where an observer looks directly at an object but fails to see it—helps explain many crashes involving motorcycles.

“Motorcycles appear to be very low on the priority list for the brain when it is filtering information,” said lead study author Kristen Pammer. She recommended drivers put motorcyclists higher on the brain radar, and be more conscious when driving.

Motorcyclist Wins $3.1 Million Verdict in Crash Lawsuit

Motorcyclists who are injured in an accident may be eligible to file a lawsuit in an effort to recover damages. Depending on the circumstances, other drivers, the motorcycle manufacturer, the dealership, or even the government may be liable. Difficult road conditions, for example, can cause motorcycle accidents, and if those roads were not properly maintained by the government, a driver may be able to file a lawsuit against them. And of course, if another driver hit you and caused an accident that was his or her fault, you may be able to file a lawsuit against that person.

In June 2017, a state Superior Court panel upheld a Pennsylvania jury’s $3.1 million damage verdict for a fatal motorcycle crash. In that case, the driver of a Dodge Durango turned into the motorcycle rider’s path. The 27-year-old rider was killed. He had a GoPro camera mounted on his helmet, and the footage was used as evidence. Investigators also found that the truck driver’s blood alcohol was above the legal limit at the time of the crash.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/motorcycle-accidents/drivers-often-guilty-of-inattentive-blindness-when-it-comes-to-motorcycles/feed/0Pressure Cookers Remain Popular, but Lawsuits Piling Uphttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/pressure-cookers-remain-popular-but-lawsuits-piling-up/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/pressure-cookers-remain-popular-but-lawsuits-piling-up/#commentsTue, 30 Jan 2018 20:29:25 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=352[...]]]>In late November 2017, CNBC reported that sales of pressure cookers, particularly the Instant Pot, were surging. The products were listed as out-of-stock with Wal-mart, and weren’t showing up in searches on Kohl’s, though they were still available on Amazon and Best Buy. “Multicooker sales are surging this year,” the report stated, noting that they grew 68 percent in the 12 months ending in October 2017.

The Statistics Portal states that retail sales of electric pressure cookers amounted to about $54.01 million in 2016 alone. Yet many of these cookers don’t perform as expected, particularly when it comes to safety features, like lids that are supposed to stay closed until all the pressure has been released.

Home Chefs Filing Lawsuits After Being Burned by Pressure Cookers

In December 2017, the Daily Hornet reported on one Tristar pressure cooker lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania on behalf of six plaintiffs who were seriously injured while using the cookers in their homes. The cooker was advertised as having built-in safety features, including a “lid safety lock” that was supposed to prevent the lid from being opened when there was still pressure inside the pot, but these plaintiffs say that the lock didn’t work.

One Texas woman, for example, was making beans and sausage for dinner. When the timer went off signaling the dinner was done, she twisted the valve to de-pressurize the cooker, and when the steam stopped, she started twisting the lid. It loosened, so she assumed it was safe to open the cooker. Soon after, the pressure cooker pot exploded, sending scalding hot food onto the woman’s chest, neck, and arms. She suffered serious burns.

Food inside a pressure cooker can reach temperatures of up to 250 degrees Fahrenheit, which can be very dangerous for home chefs. Pressure cookers work by building up steam heat inside a locked pot. As the temperature rises, the pressure does too, and that allows the heat to penetrate the food much more quickly. Foods cooked in a pressure cooker not only cook faster, but tend to stay moister than foods cooked with other methods. Families are drawn to them because they allow the cooking of wholesome foods in less time, but they also rely on the products’ safety features to prevent explosion and burn accidents.

Tristar Aggressively Advertised Safety Features

In another lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania, another six plaintiffs claimed that they were seriously injured by Tristar pressure cookers. They alleged that the cooker’s “built-in safety features” didn’t work as expected and that the manufacturers should have been aware of these defects.

The plaintiffs also stated Tristar aggressively markets their pressure cookers as “state of the art kitchen science” that allows consumers to cook family-style meals “with just the push of a button” and “in a fraction of the time” it takes with other kitchen devices.

The company has also stated that “there is no safer way to cook,” and has used social media websites like YouTube to promote professional chef endorsements. In one of those videos, culinary expert Eric Theiss states that the cooker is easy and versatile, and adds that “when your pressure cooker is up to pressure, the lid locks on. I couldn’t get this lid to open if I wanted to.”

The plaintiffs argue that Tristar’s representations about safety aren’t just misleading, “they are flatly wrong.”

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/pressure-cookers-remain-popular-but-lawsuits-piling-up/feed/0Safety Council Warns About Distracting Danger of New In-Dashboard Appshttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/safety-council-warns-about-distracting-danger-of-new-in-dashboard-apps/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/safety-council-warns-about-distracting-danger-of-new-in-dashboard-apps/#commentsTue, 23 Jan 2018 15:24:02 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=338[...]]]>Despite all the concern about distracted driving, our vehicles are becoming hubs of interaction. General Motors (GM) has been at the forefront of adding technology to their vehicles, and one of their latest additions is called “Marketplace.” The National Safety Council (NSC), however, has warned that this app, like so many others, may contribute to distracted driving, which is already causing a rise in accidents on the roadways.

NSC Warns that In-Dashboard Apps are Dangerous

“Marketplace” is a new in-car shopping application that allows vehicle owners to purchase food, coffee, and other products through the vehicle’s in-dash touchscreen. GM has announced that it will launch the app on millions of 2017 and 2018 model year vehicles that are equipped with Wi-Fi hotspots and systems compatible with the app.

Though GM says the app is designed to be in line with current voluntary driver-distraction guidelines, the NSC warns that the new addition is unsafe. President Deborah Hersman told Bloomberg: “There’s nothing about this that’s safe. If this is why they want Wi-Fi in the car, we’re going to see fatality numbers go up higher than they are now.”

GM, on the other hand, believes the app will be a safer alternative for drivers than placing similar orders for products via their smartphones. They add that with Marketplace, users have to complete only three to four steps to make their order, which is fewer than they’d have to complete on their phones. But this ease of use is exactly why the app may be distracting, as it may encourage drivers to use it more.

“Hands-free systems are not safer,” Hersman told The Drive. She added that just because these features are available in the vehicle does not mean drivers should use them.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) states that distracted driving caused 3,477 fatalities in 2015, and nearly 400,000 injuries. They add that during daylight hours, about 660,000 drivers use cell phones while driving, creating “enormous potential for deaths and injuries on U.S. roads.”

NSC Warns that In-Dashboard Apps are Dangerous

Indeed, studies have shown that hands-free is not risk-free. In 2015, research from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety concluded that hands-free technologies created mental distractions even if drivers kept their eyes on the road.

For the study, researchers compared a variety of hands-free options, including systems built into the dash of vehicles and smartphones. They then rated the level of distraction created by each. The 2015 Mazda 6 dashboard device was deemed the most distracting, while the Chevy Equinox was deemed the least, but all increased distracted driving. Researchers warned that drivers should rethink using these systems. “The lasting effects of mental distraction pose a hidden and pervasive danger that would likely come as a surprise to most drivers,” Peter Kissinger, president and chief executive of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety said in a press release.

Other studies have shown that trying to do another task while driving is simply distracting and dangerous. In 2016, researchers from the University of Sussex conducted two experiments to evaluate how distraction disrupted hand and eye movements while participants were behind the wheel. In the first one, they had them view and respond to two driving films containing hazards. The first group completed the task without distraction, and the second group completed the task while having to do another telephone task at the same time. A third group completed a phone task alone.

In the second experiment, researchers tracked the eye movements from participants while they reacted to hazards presented in 16 films of driving scenes. Half of those participants performed another task at the same time.

Results showed that compared to undistracted participants, those who were doing two tasks at once were slower to respond to hazards, detected fewer hazards on the road, committed more “looked but failed to see” errors, and demonstrated “visual tunneling,” a phenomenon where the driver sees objects only in the center of his or her field of vision.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/safety-council-warns-about-distracting-danger-of-new-in-dashboard-apps/feed/0Argo Self-Driving Vehicle Involved in Recent Pittsburgh Crashhttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/argo-self-driving-vehicle-involved-in-recent-pittsburgh-crash/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/argo-self-driving-vehicle-involved-in-recent-pittsburgh-crash/#commentsWed, 17 Jan 2018 22:33:16 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=348[...]]]>In August 2017, Argo AI started testing its self-driving vehicles in the city of Pittsburgh. On January 9, 2018, one of those vehicles was involved in a traffic accident with a box truck. Two people were injured and sent to the hospital. What does this accident say about the safety of new autonomous technologies?

Self-Driving Car Crash Occurs in Pittsburgh

Argo AI, a start-up company backed by Ford, is in the business of developing self-driving cars, and deployed several in Pittsburgh last summer. This is the first accident involving one of their vehicles, and authorities are blaming it on human error.

The box truck and the Argo vehicle collided at the intersection of 16th and Progress streets, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. The box truck reportedly ran a red light, T-boning the Argo AI vehicle. The two people who were injured were in the self-driving vehicle. Both were reported in stable condition and were later released from the hospital. At the time of this writing, it’s unclear whether the vehicle was in self-driving mode at the time of the crash.

Uber Self-Driving Cars Also Involved in Crashes

Uber was the first company to start testing self-driving vehicles in Pittsburgh. In September 2016, they put several self-driving vehicles on the road in the city. In March 2017, the company suspended the program after a self-driving vehicle crashed in Arizona, but they resumed testing three days later after determining that it was the human driver who was at fault.

Again in September 2017, an Uber self-driving car was involved in a crash in Pittsburgh. This one occurred at the intersection of Sidney and Hot Metal streets, when a black Nissan Sentra collided with an Uber SUV. No one was injured. Uber again grounded its fleet for a few hours, but after determining that neither the software nor their driver was at fault, the company resumed testing.

Agencies Rushing Autonomous Vehicles to Market

In September 2017, federal highway safety officials released updated federal guidelines for automated driving systems, expressing support for further development of self-driving vehicles, and encouraging “best practices” for safety.

In November 2017, nonprofit organization RAND released a study suggesting that earlier adoption of these technologies—even before they’re perfect—will save more lives than if we wait until all the “kinks” are out.

Not everyone is convinced that faster is better, however, Author Jeffrey Mervis asks in his December 2017 article in Science Magazine, “Are we going too fast on driverless cars?”

“While developers amass data on the sensors and algorithms that allow cars to drive themselves,” the author writes, “the research on the social, economic, and environmental effects of AVs is sparse.” He suggests that driverless cars could increase congestion, energy consumption, and pollution, and could exacerbate urban sprawl. Software glitches could lead to “repeated recalls, triggering massive travel disruptions.”

And while government agencies assure us that self-driving cars will make the roads much safer than they are now, these vehicles are years away from perfection, and in the meantime, what happens when the technology is to blame for loss of human lives?

“[C]onventional wisdom holds that the public will be much less accepting of crashes caused by software glitches or malfunctioning hardware rather than human error,” Mervis writes.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/automobile-accidents/argo-self-driving-vehicle-involved-in-recent-pittsburgh-crash/feed/0Takata Airbag Linked with 20th Fatalityhttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/takata-airbag-linked-with-20th-fatality/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/takata-airbag-linked-with-20th-fatality/#commentsTue, 16 Jan 2018 16:53:26 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=342[...]]]>Takata airbags have been at the center of the largest automotive recall in U.S. history. Recently, Honda reported that yet another person had been killed by an exploding Takata airbag. This makes 20 individuals that have allegedly died because of this defective product.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently confirmed that a ruptured Takata airbag in a Honda Civic caused the death of a driver on July 10, 2017. Meanwhile, customers are urged to check their vehicles for possible recalls, and to get any outstanding ones repaired as soon as possible.

Honda Confirms 20th Death Linked to Defective Takata Airbags

CBS News reported on December 20, 2017, that the fatality occurred in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. An automobile crash last summer resulted in the airbag exploding. Honda did not become aware of it until recently, after inspecting the 2004 Honda Civic.

After the inspection, officials from the automaker and from the NHTSA confirmed that the Takata airbag had blown apart and caused the death. The airbag in question was not the original airbag installed in the car. Instead, it was salvaged from another vehicle—a 2002 Honda Civic. The owners of the 2004 Civic had been sent multiple recall notices starting in 2014, but the repair had not been completed.

Honda has been examining hundreds of thousands of inflators from salvage yards, and has asked major online auction sites to stop the sale of the affected inflators. It is legal for junkyards to sell parts salvaged from wrecked cars to repair shops, and often the shops will be unaware of any outstanding recall on the part.

Unstable Fuel Leads to Increased Potential for Airbag Explosion

The problem with these airbags was traced back to the fuel used in the inflators. The fuel, “ammonium nitrate”, deteriorates over time, especially when exposed to high temperatures and high humidities. The NHTSA has required that Takata stop using this fuel and to replace it with something else. Meanwhile, several airbag inflators with this fuel are still in thousands of vehicles running on the road today.

When the ammonium nitrate becomes unstable, it can cause the airbag to explode upon deployment. This sends small pieces of metal and plastic shrapnel into the interior of the vehicle, which can cause life-threatening injuries to the driver or to other occupants. Twenty people have now allegedly died this way, and over 180 have been allegedly injured.

The Takata airbag recall now involves over 42 million vehicles. The company was forced into bankruptcy in 2017, and now Key Safety systems is set to take over. Key Safety plans to continue working to supply more replacement airbag inflators.

Automakers Still Behind on Takata Airbag Repairs

Though these airbags are extremely dangerous, so far, only a portion of them have been repaired. In December 2017, according to Fortune, the NHTSA issued an amended order requiring automakers to speed up the timeframe for obtaining replacement parts. The order also required automakers to focus on the riskiest vehicles first, which are those that “live” in hot and humid areas, like in Florida and Hawaii. For these high-risk vehicles, the NHTSA ordered that 85 percent be replaced by December 2017.

The Department of Transportation estimates that as of December 2, 2017, about 12.5 million of the 46 million in vehicles in the U.S. had been replaced.

]]>http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/defective-dangerous-products/takata-airbag-linked-with-20th-fatality/feed/0Pennsylvania Company Owner Pleads Guilty in Trench-Related Fatalityhttp://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/workplace-injuries/pennsylvania-company-owner-pleads-guilty-in-trench-related-fatality/
http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/workplace-injuries/pennsylvania-company-owner-pleads-guilty-in-trench-related-fatality/#commentsMon, 15 Jan 2018 14:56:11 +0000http://pittsburgh.legalexaminer.com/?p=340[...]]]>On September 28, 2015, a 21-year-old man was installing a sewer line 11 feet underground at a commercial construction site in Butler, Pennsylvania. As part of a four-man crew, he finished digging the trench about 2:00 pm Monday afternoon, but then jumped back in to pick up a shovel he’d left behind. While he was down there, the walls of soil gave way, the trench collapsed, and the man was buried under the cave-in before he could escape.

His co-workers jumped in and started digging, trying to save him, but by the time they reached him, it was too late. Rescue specialists recovered his body four hours later.

The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) investigated the incident, and determined the company the man was working for, A Rooter Man, was guilty of nine safety violations. They required the company to pay a $174,000 fine.

On November 28, 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Wayne A. George, d.b.a. A Rooter Man, pleaded guilty to one count of willful violation of OSHA regulations causing the death of an employee. Sentencing is scheduled for February 21, 2018.

OSHA Cites A Rooter Man for Several Safety Violations

Federal inspectors determined that A Rooter Man had regularly exposed multiple employees to cave-in hazards while they were working in unprotected excavations of more than five-feet deep. One serious violation stated that while the excavation was opened, underground installations were not protected, supported, or removed as necessary to safeguard employees.

In another violation, investigators noted that the company did not use retaining devices to prevent materials or equipment from falling or rolling into the excavation site, and further, did not ensure that employees were protected from cave-ins. According to OSHA standards, companies are supposed to ensure that each trench over five feet deep “is provided with an adequate protective system to protect employees from the hazards of cave-ins.”

Wayne George faces a possible six months in prison and a fine of $250,000. That sentence will be determined in February 2018, as scheduled by the judge.

OSHA Provides Guidelines for Protecting Employees

According to the Department of Health and Human Services, between 2000 and 2009, 350 workers died in trenching or excavation cave-ins, an average of 35 fatalities per year. Most of the incidents involved work on water, sewer, pipeline, and communications and power-line construction. Unfortunately, employees received no warning prior to these events. A trench can fail in an instant, and the employee has no time to get out of the way.

A single cubic yard of dirt can weigh more than 3,000 pounds and can suffocate or fatally crush workers. OSHA inspections have revealed that in most cases of trench fatalities, there was a lack of a protective system available at the work site. Many things can affect the stability of a trench, including the type of soil, the water content, environmental conditions, weight of the heavy equipment or tools, and the machine vibrations nearby.

OSHA provides different regulations for the different types of supports that are best for varying conditions. Employers need only consult these and take action to keep their employees safe.